Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
K. M. JOSEPH, HRISHIKESH ROY, B. V. NAGARATHNA, JJ.
Enforcement Directorate Government Of India – Applicant
Versus
Kapil Wadhawan & Anr. Etc. - Respondents
Interlocutory Application No.74084 of 2023 In Criminal Appeal Nos.701-702 of 2020
Decided On : 24-04-2023
Clarification - Judgment - The court clarified that the judgment was restricted to answering the specific issue referred to the larger bench and upheld the impugned order of the High Court granting default bail.
Fact of the Case:
The applicant/appellant filed an application seeking clarification of the judgment passed by the Court.
Finding of the Court:
The Court clarified 'Para 51' of the Judgment and upheld the impugned order of the High Court granting default bail.
Issues: Clarification of the judgment and the scope of its applicability to other issues raised in the appeal.
Ratio Decidendi: The judgment was restricted to answering the specific issue referred to the larger bench, and the impugned order of the High Court granting default bail was upheld.
Final Decision: The Interlocutory Application No.74084 of 2023 is allowed, and pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of.
ORDER
This application is filed by the applicant/appellant seeking clarification of the judgment dated 27th March, 2023 passed by this Court. The relief sought in the prayer, inter alia, is as follows:-
2. Heard Mr. S. V. Raju, learned Additional Solicitor General appearing on behalf of the applicant/appellant and Mr. Mukul Rohatgi and Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents.
3. The paragraph-51 in the Criminal Appeal Nos.701-702 of 2020 pronounced on 27.03.2023 by this Court following correction, should now read as under:-
The Interlocutory Application No.74084 of 2023 is allowed.
Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of.
An appeal dismissed for default without statutory sanction is void ab initio, necessitating its restoration by the court.
Consistency in the assignment of bail applications arising from the same FIR must be maintained to avoid judicial discrepancies.
The right to default bail under Section 167(2) of the Cr.P.C. is triggered by the filing of a bail application after the expiration of the statutory period for filing a charge sheet, and this right c....
The remedy for challenging the denial of regular bail is to file a Criminal Revision Petition, and the order under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C is final and should be challenged through a revision petition.
The court established that a valid report from the Public Prosecutor is essential for extending the time to file a charge-sheet, and failure to comply with procedural requirements negates the right t....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for an accused to avail of the right to be released on default bail within the specified period, failing which the right may be ext....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
